Frane Maroevic: Ukraine presented its candidacy to chair the OSCE in 2010. What were your ambitions then and do they differ from the priorities you are setting today?

 

Leonid Kozhara: Our ambitions are rooted in our perceptions of what the OSCE is and our vision of what it should be. We have always believed in the uniqueness of this Organization due to its comprehensive and co-operative approach to security.

 

The Ukrainian Chairmanship’s priorities are aimed at promoting dialogue and building consensus around many issues that could strengthen the OSCE profile as a contributor to comprehensive security and enhance its effectiveness.  We wish to contribute to the establishment of the Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian security community free of dividing lines, conflicts, spheres of influence and zones with different levels of security.

 

I see a direct connection between strengthening the profile of the OSCE and the launching of the Helsinki +40 process. This initiative has the potential to provide an important framework for clarifying the role and goals of the OSCE, adjusting its ambitions to existing realities and strengthening trust and confidence within the Organization. It is important that all participating States feel joint ownership and common responsibility for this initiative, which could be translated into practical deliverables as we approach the 40^th anniversary of the Helsinki Final Act. Ukraine is ready to provide its input.

 

Making progress on resolving the protracted conflicts is notoriously difficult. What will the Ukrainian Chairmanship bring to the table?

 

Indeed, every OSCE Chairmanship seeks to achieve progress in finding peaceful political solutions to the protracted conflicts in the OSCE area. They remain a significant threat to regional security and stability and are a serious obstacle to achieving the common goal of establishing a security community.

 

It is Ukraine’s firm position that a peaceful and lasting solution to the protracted conflicts must be based on full respect for the principles of international law. While each conflict is unique and should be approached on the individual basis, building trust and confidence between the sides is instrumental for finding durable solutions.

 

The Ukrainian Chairmanship has an ambitious agenda and making progress on protracted conflicts is one of its key priorities. At the same time it is clear that in order to achieve success, genuine commitment and efforts by the respective conflict sides are necessary. We therefore believe that the OSCE should work to strengthen political will and mutual confidence between the parties.

 

While holding the Chairmanship, we will support the existing ongoing negotiations, promote confidence-building measures and address the humanitarian needs of the population in the conflict areas. We will also further promote the role of the OSCE in the resolution of the conflicts, building on the unique and comprehensive mandate of our Organization.

 

Your first visit as the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office will be to Moldova. What messages will you deliver?

 

My visit will aim at encouraging Chisinau and Tiraspol to keep momentum in the “5+2” negotiations and further seek comprehensive conflict resolution. We should build upon the progress achieved in 2012 in resolving pressing issues of co-operation in the economic and humanitarian spheres.

 

It is of particular importance for parties to the conflict to resume and keep conducting regular bilateral meetings at a high level, which would also be conducive to bringing political issues higher[UF1]  on the agenda of the negotiations.

 

The Ukrainian Chairmanship supports all efforts aimed at reaching a settlement on the basis of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova, with the provision of a special status to the Transdniestrian region and respect for human rights and the rights of national minorities, in accordance with the European standards.

 

You set progress in re-establishing the conventional armed forces regime in Europe as one of your priorities. Why is this important, as we have been without this regime now for 5 years?

 

Arms control, disarmament and CSBMs are integral elements of the OSCE concept of comprehensive, co-operative, equal and indivisible security. By achieving substantial progress in arms control and CSBMs, we will overcome the legacy of the bloc-to-bloc confrontation of the Cold War era and prevent the emergence of new dividing lines on our continent, with its negative implications for the European security environment – especially for countries which, like Ukraine, are not parties to any politico-military alliances.       

 

We fully subscribe to the conclusion reached by all OSCE participating States in Astana that “conventional arms control remains a major instrument for ensuring military stability, predictability and transparency, and should be revitalized, updated and modernized”.

 

Ukraine sees merit in initiating discussion within the OSCE Forum for Security Co-operation on the role conventional arms control can play in the contemporary and future European security architecture. Without prejudging the outcome of such a discussion, we hope that the dialogue on this very important topic will give us the opportunity to contribute to laying the foundation for a common vision of the future of conventional arms control in Europe.  

 

Another of your priorities is energy saving and promoting renewable sources of energy. What would you hope to achieve in this area?

 

While discussing energy security issues within the OSCE we devoted considerable efforts to issues on which there are widely diverging views. We should try to focus our dialogue on what unites us. The environmental impact of energy-related activities, energy efficiency and renewable resources seem to us to be such  issues.

 

By prioritizing them we intend to further develop the energy dialogue within the OSCE and  generate political will for enhancing co-operation in the field of energy security without politicizing this issue.

 

We are encouraged by the broad support participating States have shown for Ukraine’s proposal to give this subject prominence in 2013. We believe this reflects a general understanding that adverse and inefficient use of energy resources harms economic sustainability, thus contributing to the tensions in the energy field.

 

If this understanding translates into relevant decisions and actions, we will undoubtedly come closer to the implementation of the Astana commitments on enhancing the energy security dialogue and linking economic and environmental co-operation with peaceful inter-State relations. 

 

Some participating States have expressed the need for the improvement of the election monitoring work of the OSCE. What is the position of the Ukrainian Chairmanship in this regard?

 

The OSCE’s reputation as a standard bearer in election monitoring reflects its well-established expertise and professionalism in this area.

 

Since the ODIHR was set up in 1992, it has become the principal international election observation institution in the region. We support the election observation work of the ODIHR and its autonomous status, and we believe that follow-up to recommendations made by OSCE observation missions is extremely important.

 

At the same time, there is always a room for improvement. In our view there is a need for continuous dialogue to strengthen confidence in the OSCE space, also on election-related issues. The OSCE could, for example, look into how to further enhance safeguards for impartial and professional election observation, give more prominence to the code of conduct of electoral observers and intensify the exchange of best practices. All OSCE participating States could benefit from looking more deeply into a number of election-related issues, such as the accuracy of voter lists, campaign finance transparency and ensuring balance in media coverage. This may be a worthwhile exercise for all participating States, from the viewpoint of enhancing the implementation of their OSCE commitments.

 

A number of OSCE participating States have made statements criticizing the handling of some human rights issues in Ukraine. What is your response and do you see this criticism as complicating your Chairmanship?

 

Promoting and protecting human rights are a cornerstone of Ukraine’s domestic and foreign policy.

 

Ukraine has notable achievements in establishing new standards for exercising certain rights. Some legislative changes carried out recently have been supported by public and international organizations, including the OSCE. One can name the new Criminal Procedure Code, legal regulation of the activities of civic organizations or access to public information. It is worth mentioning that the procedures for access to public information introduced by Ukraine can serve as an example worth following in the OSCE space.

 

At the same time, no democracy is perfect, and not only those OSCE participating States undergoing the transition process, but also those generally viewed as mature democracies face challenges in this area.

 

Adherence by all participating States to their commitments on human rights, democracy and the rule of law is of prime importance for the OSCE and thus will be a matter of focus for us. While holding the Chairmanship, we will do our utmost to ensure that these commitments and obligations are honored by all participating States.

 

The challenge of chairing the OSCE is that the 57 participating States have different priorities and strategic objectives, which makes it difficult to reach consensus on many issues. In what areas do you think you will need to work most?

        

Let me refer once again to the Astana commitment to the vision of a free, democratic, common and indivisible Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian security community. I see this commitment as a strong mandate for continuing efforts to enhance the OSCE’s capabilities for addressing the numerous challenges and threats affecting the region, thus increasing the Organization’s relevance to every participating State.

 

The OSCE has a well-developed acquis of commitments in all three dimensions and we need to maintain a sustained focus on their implementation in a balanced manner. However, we also need to be mindful of negative trends in the Organization, one of which is the obvious lack of mutual confidence and political will. That is one of the main reasons why we have seen some discouraging tendencies, in particular the failure to take decisions in the human dimension for the second consecutive year.

 

I think it is not by accident that the subject of unfinished historical reconciliation between East and West is now mentioned with growing frequency within academic circles and civil society. There is a pressing need to, first of all, change our mindsets – from confrontational thinking to a co-operative approach.

 

Thus Ukraine sees its Chairmanship mission as one of further promoting conditions that would lead to this kind of change. I am confident that Ukraine, with its rich history, huge cultural heritage and clear European aspirations is well placed for carrying out this mission. I believe that all OSCE countries, each of which might naturally have different perspectives and priorities regarding OSCE activities, must invest more effort into developing common goals and translating them into common actions.

 

I strongly believe that by uniting the efforts of all OSCE participating States, we will be able to enhance the Organization’s role in strengthening security and stability in the OSCE area.

Security Community, 1/2013 ,